Why look back and accomplish nothing? Lots of opportunities to actually do something, but I see little initiative coming from the Republicans in Congress. They're more than happy accomplishing nothing and simply obstructing progress. I remember Speaker Boehner promising that the Republican House would do something about immigration reform by the end of the year. Frankly, I don't think that he can get his act together to do anything meaningful. Instead, he's bent on killing the ACA. What are his chances of winning that one?

On another front, I'd like to see some progress on gun control and instituting mandatory background checks. You think that Republicans can pass some meaningful legislation on this important topic, or will they continue to roll over for the NRA and do nothing?

Seemingly, you would prefer that Republicans continue in their vain attempts to dig up some dirt on the Benghazi event. What's the future in that path? After wasting a year already, most sensible folks can see past their ridiculous charade and how fruitless it will be. Sooner or later, I hope that you get the picture and can move on.

Nothing wrong with continuing to research it as long as my tax money isn't used and those folks in that link are taken off the case and some sane folks were put in charge.
No wait ,they did that already and found nothing so our tax money is now being given to psychos who think Obama is a member of AlQueda.
You see anything wrong with this use of tax money, NW?
Or did you not look at the link because you figured there was no proof of a crime committed by Obama in there?

Nothing wrong with continuing to research it as long as my tax money isn't used and those folks in that link are taken off the case and some sane folks were put in charge.
No wait ,they did that already and found nothing so our tax money is now being given to psychos who think Obama is a member of AlQueda.
You see anything wrong with this use of tax money, NW?
Or did you not look at the link because you figured there was no proof of a crime committed by Obama in there?

Listen to yourself, "Obama is a member of AlQueda", really, do you really think that some people here think that???????????? Deep end.

As for me, I'd just like to know who pushed the video, and who said "stand down".

Nothing wrong with continuing to research it as long as my tax money isn't used and those folks in that link are taken off the case and some sane folks were put in charge.
No wait ,they did that already and found nothing so our tax money is now being given to psychos who think Obama is a member of AlQueda.
You see anything wrong with this use of tax money, NW?
Or did you not look at the link because you figured there was no proof of a crime committed by Obama in there?

Listen to yourself, "Obama is a member of AlQueda", really, do you really think that some people here think that?

has anybody heard from any of the eyewitnesses yet? Any TV interviews? Where are they?

Muzzled. Federal gov employees are strictly forbidden to make ANY public comments on political issues unless expressly and individually authorized as an official part of their job, so if an issue is inherently or by declaration political, they are muzzled. If any administration official says of Benghazi, "S'political", only designated public relations officials, like I was as Deputy Chief for Public Affairs of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory, could publicly say a single word about the issue. No one else could speak (or protest, demonstrate, march, rally, etc.) of it. Leaks are grounds for firing, and at my level the threat was very real. At the Washington, DC level, it can be (mis)used as a defensive weapon, as it appears to be with Benghazi.

Maybe some of the Benghazi shouters should drink some cold water rather than tequila, and search for truth instead of clubs to try to bash Obama and Hillary. It turns out the conservative source for much of their stories on Benghazi, Dylan Davies, is lying:

This is, of course, the whistle-blower cited above by Isobars who he claimed was "muzzled".

Quote:

CBS News apologized this morning for airing the accusations of a now-apparently-fake Benghazi whistleblower, Dylan Davies.

Davies is the author of a new bombshell book accusing the Obama administration of massive security failures leading up to the fatal attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya in September of 2012.

Davies repeated his fanciful story on this past Sundayís 60 Minutes television show, in which Davies claimed to have been at the Benghazi consulate during the attack, and heroically recounted how he climbed the compoundís 12 foot wall and clocked a terrorist with the butt of his rifle, and how he personally witnessed the charred remains of US Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack.

Or at least, thatís what Davies told 60 Minutes. What he reportedly told the FBI is another story entirely.

Benghazi attack ďwitnessĒ Dylan Davies told FBI he was nowhere near the attack

According to a blockbuster story last night from the New York Times, Davies told the FBI that he was never anywhere near the US consulate in Benghazi during the firefight. He told the FBI that he didnít get to the consulate until the next morning, long after the fighting was over.

This is too systematic a part of the right wing play book to be an accident. Rather, it is a sign of the deep cynicism behind the Koch funding machine. Hire liars to spread false scandals about your political opponents. Hire liars to spread false science about global warming. Make sure that somebody attacks those who say "wait a minute." (mrgybe's attacks on the Port of Oakland, and regulation in general.) Hire talk radio hosts to spread the lies. Hide the sources of funding. Count on the know nothing aspect of the conservatives, particularly the social conservatives, to not check the facts. But don't use the n word. The playbook.

How much do you think Dylan Davies was paid, and by whom? Wouldn't you like laws that let you find out? You won't get any from Republicans.

Writers like him have found that conservatives only want to hear that Obama is the bad guy.
If that is the theme your book sells, truth be damned.
There are lots of other fake media reports they can move on to and celebrate as the "facts getting muzzled."
Note how upset some posters are about Mac checking facts and sources so often.
The Truth isn't really a liberal plot is it?

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum